2) I don't mind the Mexicans getting it again. I think 1986 was a great World Cup. There is a lot more passion for the game there than in the United States. So there is no way that the US would get it so early again after 1994.


Mexico could not host the World Cup, The infastructure is not up to scratch

It will all come down to lobbying.

What Oz could do to help its cause a heck of a lot is to get the A-League to grow bigger and bigger, host the World Club Cup and Asian Nations Champs.

We have staged World Youth Champs twice to packed houses, Olympics twice to HUGE attendances.

FIFA knows this all too well, especially after the Atlanta shimozzle, and would be keen for Oz to stage the Cup because they know we would do a pretty good job.

Note: The Rugby World Cup in 2003 was the biggest of all time and made incredible profits for the IRB and ARU.

it is a matter of time

If FIFA holds a Cup down here they will make a lot of money from sold out stadiums, paying top dollar for a ticket. Not heavily marked down prices you would have to have in places like South Africa, Brazil, China etc.. just so the locals can afford a ticket.
There lies the problem with a WC in Oz . . . stadiums or should I say the availability of stadiums. I believe the WC would have to be played in the middle of the AFL and Rugby League seasons. Do you expect these comps to just go into hibernation for a couple of months and aid a competitor? There are way too many contractual issues that have these stadiums tied to their respective football codes and I just don't see a way around it, unless we convince FIFA to hold the WC in October :) I don't like the chances of that lol.

Apart from that issue, I have no doubt Australia would host a very successful tournament.

Who actually ownes the Telstra Dome and MCG? Unless its actually the AFL then surely it would make sense to shift everything into either of them and let the world cup use the other stadium?

As for smaller stadiums I'd say that Australia's best chance of getting the WC would be to build/expand alot of 40,000+ Soccer/Rugby specific stadiums in cities that don't currently have them(basically everywhere outside Sydney/Brisbane). The legacy for soccer is obviously going to be an important part if any Australian bid and I could see the WC itself boasting soccers popularity far more than it did in the US. I don't think theirs any country in the world that would make more effort into making sure they perform well in any major sporting event they host.

I could see distance being a problem though as you need at least two stadiums in order to host a group in a specific area, are western australia or the northern territories going to be able to come up with that?

Aussie could never hold it. Not spreaded enough and mostly ovals.

A flyover and inside view!

MCG-100,000
http://www.airviewonline.com.au/photos/supplier-1/0508/2602/1-0508-2602-46.jpg

http://www.melbournephotos.net/images/2006-03-23%20Melbourne%20-%20MCG%20Commonwealth%20Games/MCG.jpg

Telstra Stadium-83,500
http://www.airviewonline.com.au/photos/0409/1407/0409-1407-57.jpg

http://www.weeklytimes.com.au/2005/10_october/05_10_05/image/sports/field.jpg

StadiumWA-70,000
http://www.stadiumwa.com/images/92.jpg

Telstra Dome-56,000
http://www.airviewonline.com.au/photos/supplier-1/0508/2602/1-0508-2602-23.jpg

Suncorp Stadium-53,000
http://www.airviewonline.com.au/photos/supplier-1/0507/2726/1-0507-2726-24.jpg

http://www.rugbyheaven.smh.com.au/rwc2003/graphics/suncorp.jpg

Sydney Football Stadium-43,000
http://www.airviewonline.com.au/photos/0307/0523/0307-0523-38.jpg

http://www.addaflagpoles.com.au/Rugby.jpg

Aussie could never hold it. Not spreaded enough and mostly ovals.

Mostly ovals?

Only 3 would be ovals, which is fewer than many WC's have athletics tracks. And one of the ovals is bigger than any stadium in Europe.

Aussie could never hold it. Not spreaded enough and mostly ovals.

Not "speaded" enough???...

Perth-Sydney=4000kms

and more "ovals" in Germany 2006 than what Australia would propose.

ExSydney, is that stadiumWA actually going to be built?
What about Subiaco? Thats what, about 50k? AAMI stadium is about 52k.

I dont think stadiums are an issue. Stadiums can always be upgraded, seating reconfigured to bring the fans closer to the pitch, stadiums built. The issue is the world cup clashing with the other codes in my opinion.

ExSydney, is that stadiumWA actually going to be built?
What about Subiaco? Thats what, about 50k? AAMI stadium is about 52k.

I dont think stadiums are an issue. Stadiums can always be upgraded, seating reconfigured to bring the fans closer to the pitch, stadiums built. The issue is the world cup clashing with the other codes in my opinion.

The only code that has a problem is AFL and especially in Melbourne.As mentioned previously,the AFL dont own the MCG.If the World Cup was in Oz,then maybe the AFL might keep Telstra Dome to itself.

As for the NRL,there are numerous NRL standard venues across Sydney(SCG,Parramatta Stadium,Concord etc) and Brisbane(GABBA,ANZ) that can cater the local Rugby League teams for a couple of months.

Saying that,the AFL and NRL have moved their season ahead 1 month for the Sydney Olympics,so they are willing to adjust if they have too

As for StadiumWA,there is obviously a demand for a large stadium to cater for both AFL,Rugby and Football codes.Thats pic is a proposal,but I can see it happening.
As for AAMI,i know it holds 55,000 and is an all seater,but do you really think its up to the standard of others?To me,its not a suitable football venue.The MCG gets away with it because of its size.Adelaide would probably require a permanant rectangular stadium seating roughly 25,000 and upgradable with temporary stands to 40,000 for a WC.

Shifting the topic a little have the Brazilians come up with any redevolpment plans yet? I remember seeing 2-3 renders for new stadium awhile ago but nothing in terms of capacities.

I believe the "rules" are....

10+ 40,000 capacity
Two stadiums in only 1 city
70,000+ capacity for final
Either 50,000+ or 60,000+ for semi's

i just had a look at the excellent austadiums.com and from what i can tell right now these are the stadiums australia could use for a possible world cup bid:


1) mcg (100,00, melbourne): acceptable, but it's an oval so it's not very well configured for football.
2) telstra stadium (83,500, sydney): acceptable, despite large spaces behind each goal.
3) telstra dome (56,347, melbourne): acceptable, but again an oval.
4) suncorp stadium (52,500, brisbane): perfect configuration. definately in.
5) AAMI stadium (51,515, adelaide): again, another oval.
6) subiaco oval (42,922, perth): and another oval.


rejected venues:
- queensland sports and athletics centre (48,400, brisbane): melbourne's already hosting two venues, brisbane's already hosting one, and on top of that it's an athletics venue - hardly ideal.
- gabba (42,000, brisbane): as above, and it's yet another oval.
- sydney cricket ground (44,000, sydney): as above.
- aussie stadium (42,000, sydney): as above, although it's configuration is good.


so it looks to me as though australia currently has six venues to put forward for a possible world cup bid, although having said that four of these are poorly-configured ovals.

agreed? or have i missed stuff out, etc?

oh yeah, and what's the deal with a possible clash between AFL, etc and the timing of the world cup (june-july)?

iagreed? or have i missed stuff out, etc?




yepp..Telstra Dome have retractable seating
Also,Why leave Aussie Stadium out?..Ive never heard of this 2 stadium for only 1 city rule...technically,Telstra Stadium is not in Sydney,its in the city of Auburn.Aussie Stadium is in Sydney.
Aussie Stadium is in,in my books.

yepp..Telstra Dome have retractable seating
Also,Why leave Aussie Stadium out?..Ive never heard of this 2 stadium for only 1 city rule...technically,Telstra Stadium is not in Sydney,its in the city of Auburn.Aussie Stadium is in Sydney.
Aussie Stadium is in,in my books.

cheers...

likely venues:
1) mcg (100,00, melbourne): acceptable, but it's an oval so it's not very well configured for football.
2) telstra stadium (83,500, "west sydney"): acceptable, despite large spaces behind each goal.
3) telstra dome (56,347, melbourne): acceptable, although issues exist regarding the performance of the retractable seating in an otherwise oval venue.
4) suncorp stadium (52,500, brisbane): perfect configuration. definately in.
5) AAMI stadium (51,515, adelaide): again, another oval.
6) subiaco oval (42,922, perth): and another oval.
7) aussie stadium (42,000, sydney): good configuration, although a possible conflict exists regarding telstra stadium's exact location (is it in sydney as well, or is it in "west sydney"? ;))

rejected venues:
- queensland sports and athletics centre (48,400, brisbane): melbourne's already hosting two venues, brisbane's already hosting one, and on top of that it's an athletics venue - hardly ideal.
- gabba (42,000, brisbane): as above, and it's yet another oval.
- sydney cricket ground (44,000, sydney): as above.

remaining issues:
- still need a few more 40,000+ stadiums in alternative locations.
- a perceived over-reliance on cricket grounds, as opposed to purpose-built stadia.
- possible conflict of sports seasons.
- possible domestic disinterest, unsold tickets, etc.

------------------------------------

for the record i'm not criticising, just trying to figure out how it'd work. trust me, i wouldn't mind australia hosting 2014 - that'd mean one less competing candidate for a possible england 2018 bid! ;)

cheers..

7) aussie stadium (42,000, sydney-ish): good configuration, will have to be marketed as an out-of-sydney stadium though!

.

Actually,other way round....Telstra Stadium is west of Sydney,Aussie Stadium is the Sydney venue! ;)

I don't think you can rule out a few stadiums being built on the back of the world cup, pretty much every stadium at the last two world cups and euro 2004 was purpose built afterall.

Actually,other way round....Telstra Stadium is west of Sydney,Aussie Stadium is the Sydney venue! ;)

amended! :)

Note that the MCG's dimensions are already quite unusual for an Aussie Rules ground or a cricket ground for that matter because it's extremely wide - the boundary rope goes in a long way for cricket matches. Other oval grounds are more like ovals rather than a circle - a lot more like an athletics stadium.

The AFL season goes from March to September though it is possible for the AFL to schedule rounds without using the MCG (like they are now). If Telstra Dome is also in use, then we have a major problem with scheduling - and matches would be played at neutral grounds in clubless cities or the season would have to be rescheduled.

For the record, the Melbourne Cricket Club owns the MCG and they are quite restrictive about it (hence the often empty Members' Reserve) - they didn't allow the MCG to be used for the 1956 Olympics until the government threatened to never pay for redevelopments of the MCG. People also say that it was their political influence that halved the capacity of Waverley Park to 75,000 and its eventual demise.


EDIT: The Telstra Dome's retractable seats have been only ever used once, where it was found to be a waste of money (but that might have been because Rugby League in Melbourne has almost zero popularity) and the mechanism has fallen into disrepair. Maybe they'll fix it for the World Cup though.

Why not just hold the World Cup either between Oct/Nov or Feb/Mar?

The world's soccer comps can surely have ONE lousy year in their ENTIRE existance where they do things slighty differently. Besides the players won't be completely buggered after an entire season if they went for the Oct/Nov option.

The other possibility is during the winter break in Europe over January/Feb. The English have been talking about doing it for a while now.

Why not just hold the World Cup either between Oct/Nov or Feb/Mar?


If Australia were to bid for the World Cup then I'd recommend not requesting that FIFA shift the tournament by 4-5 months and rearrange hundreds of domestic leagues to take into account the seasonal differences down under.

Besides, it'll go to Brazil for 2014 anyway.

Shifting when the WC is held would be difficult for anyone to achieve. The big clubs already are hesitant to releasing thier big name players. Now try getting them to shift thier seasons around, and thier would be mayhem.

ExSydney, about AAMI, if it would be used, it would most definately be upgraded.
About the oval issue. Couldnt that be resolved by placing temporary seating to create a rectangular playing pitch in the middle of thr ground, and in the process increasing capacity? Surely for example, AAMI's capacity could top 60k in such an event.

However, Id love to see a new purpose built stadium here.

Why not just hold the World Cup either between Oct/Nov or Feb/Mar?

The world's soccer comps can surely have ONE lousy year in their ENTIRE existance where they do things slighty differently. Besides the players won't be completely buggered after an entire season if they went for the Oct/Nov option.

The other possibility is during the winter break in Europe over January/Feb. The English have been talking about doing it for a while now.

whether you like it or not the timing of the world cup is non-negotiable. any bid based on altering its timing would have about as much chance of success as ronaldinho would with the ladies if he wasn't absolutely minted.

isn't that right, ronny?

http://sport.ard.de/sp/fussball/news200307/16/img/ronaldinho_dpa_150.jpg

thought so. :D

Last time I see, no country was FIFA World Cup 2014 host. So, I can't understand why some people say that FIFA would take the organization from Brazil. They just may not give it to them, and if that happens there's only one to blame: Brazil.

Why not just hold the World Cup either between Oct/Nov or Feb/Mar?

The world's soccer comps can surely have ONE lousy year in their ENTIRE existance where they do things slighty differently. Besides the players won't be completely buggered after an entire season if they went for the Oct/Nov option.

The other possibility is during the winter break in Europe over January/Feb. The English have been talking about doing it for a while now.

It's hilarious. Just because Australia wants to do it in Oct/Nov of Feb/Mar, the rest of the world needs to change their competitions and schedules? :weirdo:

Shifting when the WC is held would be difficult for anyone to achieve. The big clubs already are hesitant to releasing thier big name players. Now try getting them to shift thier seasons around, and thier would be mayhem.

ExSydney, about AAMI, if it would be used, it would most definately be upgraded.
About the oval issue. Couldnt that be resolved by placing temporary seating to create a rectangular playing pitch in the middle of thr ground, and in the process increasing capacity? Surely for example, AAMI's capacity could top 60k in such an event.

However, Id love to see a new purpose built stadium here.

As I said I think one of the big issues would be how the WC would advance soccer in Australia and building some decent sized venues rather than just using cricket/AFL ovals would surely help that.

the hole thing is so nonsense, since when argentina and chile has more condition to host a world cup than Brazil? 80% of argentina population lives in buenos Aires, and Chile is a country with 15 milhon people who doesn´t care about football. i mean it would be a one city world cup?

Blatter was just trying to shake Brazil up, they have been totally asleep at the wheel thinking that since all of South America including Argentina gave their support to Brazil, the only thing left was for FIFA to announce it and everything would be done by magic. Brazil has given not even a sketch of what they would do should they host the world cup. Blatter is letting Brazil know that this time around procrastination may cost them dearly.

I don't want to sound beligerant or insulting, but after what I have read here it's more than obvious most here don't know where Argentina is located on the map, let alone it's cities, economics, or culture.

For the record 80% of Argentina's population does not live in one city. Whoever said this absurd figure doesn't know what solar system they inhabit~!

If by any reason Brazil screws their bid, then it would probably go to North America, but probably not Mexico. Argentina is with Brazil all the way for 2014, but should the fumble their shot, they can forget about support next time around because then Argentina will go all out for it's own bid.

Am i reading this right, do the aussies want to change the world cup schedule and hold it another time in the year? The cheek of those aussies!!

BTW wots the weather lik in oz during June July.

Am i reading this right, do the aussies want to change the world cup schedule and hold it another time in the year? The cheek of those aussies!!

:hahaha:

Most of the Aussies posting in this thread have no fucking idea what they're talking about. Don't worry.

The sheer idiocy of some of the posts is doing my fucking head in :bash:

BTW wots the weather lik in oz during June July.

Depends what part of the country.

The southern states get pretty bloody cold, around Sydney it's not too bad and as you go up northern NSW and Queensland it's pretty bloody nice.

I assume Perth would be pretty nice too.

Have there not been a few threads of late showing the new stadiums of Brazil being built?

If it is taken from Brazil, my money would be on Mexico, then the USA.
Not likely, being that Mexico has already hosted it twice. I would say it's between Austrailia and USA if South America doesn't get it. Australia has never hosted it before, but it would be way WAY easier for the USA to host it. So it could go either way.

Most of this just seems like an empty threat from Blatter anyways, to keep them from getting complacent. I don't think they would really act on it, unless worse came to worse. But all of this seems really unlikely.

This is a pointless thread. I've read several articles and not once has Australia been mentioned. Blatter's quote about moving the world cup from South America is as follows: "No soy un profeta. Pero, si no están dadas las condiciones, el Mundial se trasladará probablemente a la parte Norte de las Américas", pronosticó. ("I am not a prophet. But, if the conditions are not right, the World Cup will move, probably to the Northern part of the Americas" he predicted.") Note there is no mention of Australia, nor does he even specify the USA or Mexico.

Australia can, and eventually probably will, host a World Cup sometime in the distant future (12-20yrs down the road). But don't get your hopes up for this one. Canada has a better chance of hosting this than Australia.

Mexico has the best soccer infrastructure in Latin America and it wouldn't take much more than a few cans of paint for them to host another world cup. The same can't be said of Brazil, whose stadiums are in need of a major upgrade.

Chile and Argentina have already declared their support for Brazil's candidacy. There is some interest in both countries in hosting it, but the will is not there in the upper decision making circles, both in their football associations as well as political circles. That said, I think both countries could realistically host the world cup should Brazil's candidacy falter.

This whole things is merely designed to get Brazil moving. They have been very complacent about their hosting the 2014 World Cup and this could cause them some problems.

Not likely, being that Mexico has already hosted it twice. I would say it's between Austrailia and USA if South America doesn't get it. Australia has never hosted it before, but it would be way WAY easier for the USA to host it. So it could go either way.
No, it could not go either way. Australia is not on the radar for 2014. I would not put it past FIFA to hand Mexico another world cup (after all, they received the 1986 World Cup because Colombia wasn't up to it). The USA I think would be the most likely choice (think of all the $$$$$) but Canada may have a small chance too.

In any case, it would be inconceivable for FIFA not to give the 2014 World Cup to Brazil, no matter how badly prepared they may be in the end. Brazil is Brazil and when it comes to getting the world cup no ammount of ill preparation will cause FIFA to award it to someone else. Only Brazil could get away with this. I think they'll be ready.

This is a pointless thread. I've read several articles and not once has Australia been mentioned. Blatter's quote about moving the world cup from South America is as follows: "No soy un profeta. Pero, si no están dadas las condiciones, el Mundial se trasladará probablemente a la parte Norte de las Américas", pronosticó. ("I am not a prophet. But, if the conditions are not right, the World Cup will move, probably to the Northern part of the Americas" he predicted.") Note there is no mention of Australia, nor does he even specify the USA or Mexico.

Australia can, and eventually probably will, host a World Cup sometime in the distant future (12-20yrs down the road). But don't get your hopes up for this one. Canada has a better chance of hosting this than Australia.

Mexico has the best soccer infrastructure in Latin America and it wouldn't take much more than a few cans of paint for them to host another world cup. The same can't be said of Brazil, whose stadiums are in need of a major upgrade.

Chile and Argentina have already declared their support for Brazil's candidacy. There is some interest in both countries in hosting it, but the will is not there in the upper decision making circles, both in their football associations as well as political circles. That said, I think both countries could realistically host the world cup should Brazil's candidacy falter.

This whole things is merely designed to get Brazil moving. They have been very complacent about their hosting the 2014 World Cup and this could cause them some problems.

Canada isn't better either, USA hosted it already 12 years ago, Mexico hosted it twice already. Canada's the only other American option but needs fierce renovation and expansion.

Canada:

Commonwealth Stadium - Edmonton - 60.217
BC Place - Vancouver - 59.841
Rogers Centre - Toronto - 53.000

With expansion:
McMahon - Calgary - 37.317
Canad Inns - Winnipeg - 29.503
Ivor Winne - Hamilton - 29.183
Frank Clair - Ottawa - 28.826
Taylor - Regina - 27.332
Molson - Montrèal - 25.000
PEPS - Quebec City - 18.500

That would make ten.

Mexico

Azteca - Mexico City - 114.465
Olimpico Universitario - Mexico City - 72.449
La Corregidora - Queretaro - 50.000
Cuahutehmoc - Puebla - 42.649
Universitario - Monterrey - 45.000
Luis Pirata Fuente - Veracruz - 43.154
Jalisco - Guadalajara - 63.163

With expansion:
Tecnologico - Monterry - 38.622 (but mexico city already has 2 stadiums)
Corona - Torreón - 25.500
3 de Marzo - Guadalajara - 30.000 (but mexico city already has 2 stadiums)
Morelos - Morelia - 38.384
NEZA 86 - Nezahualcoyotl - 37.075
Nou Camp - León - 33.943
Universitario - Toluca - 32.000
León Chavez - Irapuato - 30.712
Miguel Hidalgo - Pachuca - 30.000
Manuel Reyna - Tuxtla Gutierrez - 25.000

Should do it.

Depends what part of the country.

The southern states get pretty bloody cold, around Sydney it's not too bad and as you go up northern NSW and Queensland it's pretty bloody nice.

I assume Perth would be pretty nice too.

if that is the case y not keep the world cup at this time, y do some aussies want to change the time it is played?

it means nothing that the vast majority of australia's stadiums are oval!?

watching football with an athletics track around it is bad enough - watching a world cup game in a cricket ground would like watching table tennis at wimbledon!

the odd athletics stadium as a world cup venue is tolerated, the majority of venues being cricket grounds would be intolerable.

There is a thing called temporary seating

if that is the case y not keep the world cup at this time, y do some aussies want to change the time it is played?

Don't worry mate, the only people who said it should be changed is 2 idiots on this forum.

You know if it won't be in Oz I'd be more than happy if Canada got the World Cup and NOT the USA or Mexico.

Nothing against Yanks or Mexicans but you guys have already had the World Cup. Its someone elses turn.

There is a thing called temporary seating

and there is also a thing called THE world cup, and THE world cup cannot be played in a bunch of cricket grounds with half-arsed temporary seating wheeled-in to improve appalling views, particularly when countless other countries could provide all the necessary purpose-built grounds at a minutes' notice.

you just don't get it. this isn't about australia - this is about football.

You know if it won't be in Oz I'd be more than happy if Canada got the World Cup and NOT the USA or Mexico.

Nothing against Yanks or Mexicans but you guys have already had the World Cup. Its someone elses turn.

it is not necessarily someone elses turn. it is the potential turn of any country that can meet all the necessary prerequisites. if that country is a new host, fantastic, if not, it's irrelevant that they've hosted the thing before. the most important thing is that they can host it to the standards demanded by fifa and the international footballing community (and rightly so).

Canada will not host one.

Canada would only have 2 or 3 suitable venues.

most of thier stadiums are either undercover (domed) or outdoors with astroturf. And Canada are never likely to qualify on thier own for a WC, I suspect that after Sth Africa, FIFA will at least expect the host to have a chance of qualifying for WC's (SA are absolutely hopeless),

^^^^^^^^

SA is a pretty decent side in their defense, they are almost as good as Australia and we utterly flogged England in London and got over Uruguay. The problem is that Africa is incredibly difficult to qualify through. Only the best team from a particular ground qualifies, unlike the European system where the top 2 or 3 get through.

You can bet your life that the USA WOULD NOT qualify through Africa. It is very inhospitable and the opposition down there is very, very tough.

^^^^^^^^

SA is a pretty decent side in their defense, they are almost as good as Australia and we utterly flogged England in London and got over Uruguay. The problem is that Africa is incredibly difficult to qualify through. Only the best team from a particular ground qualifies, unlike the European system where the top 2 or 3 get through.

You can bet your life that the USA WOULD NOT qualify through Africa. It is very inhospitable and the opposition down there is very, very tough.

you don't know anything about football, please stop pretending to - you're embarassing yourself.

you don't know anything about football, please stop pretending to - you're embarassing yourself.

I told ya, didnt i.

Unfortunately, there are too many people down here that have been so ignorant for so long and know nothing about the game. That's changing though.

Fortunately, there are also alot of people down here who love the beautiful game and are very knowledgable.

You'll find 'em in such sites as the one in my signature.

The guys on here are just plain embarresing :hahaha:

and there is also a thing called THE world cup, and THE world cup cannot be played in a bunch of cricket grounds with half-arsed temporary seating wheeled-in to improve appalling views, particularly when countless other countries could provide all the necessary purpose-built grounds at a minutes' notice.

you just don't get it. this isn't about australia - this is about football.

So you are saying this about THE Olympics too, which have temporary seating as well

to take an event of that size from the only country that had ben in every world cup since the first one, where it is a really important event. what do you think it wouldbe the reaction in Brazil if Fifa took the world cup from Brazil in the year the team makes 100 years.

They shouldn't have an automatic right to it. At the moment their stadiums are dreadful.

They shouldn't have an automatic right to it. At the moment their stadiums are dreadful.

Brazil's stadiums are like 50 years old

and there is also a thing called THE world cup, and THE world cup cannot be played in a bunch of cricket grounds with half-arsed temporary seating wheeled-in to improve appalling views, particularly when countless other countries could provide all the necessary purpose-built grounds at a minutes' notice.

you just don't get it. this isn't about australia - this is about football.
What I don't understand is wtf does it matter what shape the stadiums are when most likely they'll be filled with Aussies anyway and people like yourself (along with billions of others) will be watching the tournament from home. How will a non rectangular stadium affect your TV viewing experience???

:bash:

What I don't understand is wtf does it matter what shape the stadiums are when most likely they'll be filled with Aussies anyway and people like yourself (along with billions of others) will be watching the tournament from home. How will a non rectangular stadium affect your TV viewing experience???

:bash:

As someone mentioned on the german world cup thread I don't think the views are actually that important during the world cup, its such a big event it will attract crowds anyway. Whats important(at least to FIFA) is that the world cup leave some kind of legacy for soccer in Australia, if your just using ovals soccer clubs will most likely not have access to them and even if they do the poor views become much more important when your trying to attract people to league games week in week out.

I wouldnt say that Brazil have done "nothing" as far as planning goes, there have been renders for a few new stadiums but we've heard nothing in the way of capacities of possible number of venues.

it's true

:hahaha:

Most of the Aussies posting in this thread have no fucking idea what they're talking about. Don't worry.

The sheer idiocy of some of the posts is doing my fucking head in :bash:



Depends what part of the country.

The southern states get pretty bloody cold, around Sydney it's not too bad and as you go up northern NSW and Queensland it's pretty bloody nice.

I assume Perth would be pretty nice too.


I think that is a relative term, "cold" it wouldn't be called considering most of the European leagues play matches in 0 degree weather at some point in their seasons. In June Adelaide is around 18 max 10 min, and Melbourne isn't that much colder so I think we will be alright :)

I think that is a relative term, "cold" it wouldn't be called considering most of the European leagues play matches in 0 degree weather at some point in their seasons. In June Adelaide is around 18 max 10 min, and Melbourne isn't that much colder so I think we will be alright :)

You're Lucky. Queensland is lucky to get 18 degrees as a minimum for half of winter.

I think that is a relative term, "cold" it wouldn't be called considering most of the European leagues play matches in 0 degree weather at some point in their seasons. In June Adelaide is around 18 max 10 min, and Melbourne isn't that much colder so I think we will be alright :)

Indeed, the climate in Australia in June would actually be far more suitable for games than most world cups have been.

I think Australia COULD do it. But not in 2014. That's too soon and we don't have the facilities. We really only have five suitable stadiums on hand.

Telstra Stadium(West Sydney)
Aussie Stadium(Sydney)
MCG(Melbourne)
Telstra Dome(Melbourne)
Suncorp Stadium(Brisbane)

Upgradable stadiums would be

Bruce Stadium(Canberra--Having games in the national capital would be good anyway. Also used for the ACT Brumbies(Rugby Union--RU) and the Canberra Raiders(Rugby League--RL))
Dairy Farmers Stadium(Townsville--Big post-World Cup use for the North Queensland Cowboys(RL) and possibly if the Queensland Reds(RU) or Queensland Roar(Soccer) decide to move some of their home games around Qld.)
EnergyAustralia Stadium(Newcastle--Again, big post-World Cup for the Newcastle Knights(RL) and possibly the NSW Waratahs(RU) or Newcastle Jets(Soccer))
Other possibilities include WIN Stadium(Woolongong)--Also used for St. George Illawara Dragons(RL)
http://rugbyheaven.smh.com.au/rwc2003/graphics/winstadium.jpg
*Note Western Stand(Left, red seats) is already planned for reconstruction, and will add another 5000 to the stadium's current capacityand stands on the hill in front of the beach wouldn't be too hard to construct. Upgrade the southern stand to mirror the north, and you've got yourself a good stadium.
Members Equity Stadium(Perth)--Easily Upgradable--Used for the Western Force(RU) and Perth Glory(Soccer)
http://www.austadiums.com/stadiums/redevelopment/photos/perthoval1.jpg

So that's a total of 10 stadiums

BTW wots the weather lik in oz during June July.

Well, if you were in Melbourne @ the MCG or Telstra Dome or if you were at and upgraded Bruce Stadium in Canberra, you'd be freezing your ass off. Sydney and Brisbane aren't that bad. Oh, and if you were at an upgraded Dairy Farmers Stadium in Townsville, Far North Queensland's winter = Europe/USA summer.

Hey, be glad that at least the MCG's stands now have a roof instead of being totally out in the open, and the windswept Waverley Park has been demolished. :)

it is not necessarily someone elses turn. it is the potential turn of any country that can meet all the necessary prerequisites. if that country is a new host, fantastic, if not, it's irrelevant that they've hosted the thing before. the most important thing is that they can host it to the standards demanded by fifa and the international footballing community (and rightly so).

Ironically the increases in size to let more nationals take part in the WC has also drastically reduced the number of countries able to host it. Most nations can support a big national stadium and a few other large ones for the dominate club sides but very few can come up with 10-12 40,000+ venues.

Its not as if the past history of hostes has no effect on the choices though. The lack of a previous African host clearly lead to SA hosting in 2010 and the fact Brazil havent hosted since 1950 clearly makes them the frontrunners for 2014, even the Germans can claim this is the first time a unified Germany has hosted it. Similarly I don't think the USA hosting twice in 20 years or the Mexicans 3 times in 44 years could get enough support for Blatter to push it though. The only way the former would get 2014 IMHO is if the Brazilians were awarded it then had to pull out a la Columbia in 1986 and even then England or Spain would be more obvious hosts with stadiums ready prepaired.

I still think that in general we might be seeing a shift back to mainly established leagues post 2010. With the USA, Korea/Japan and SA FIFA were clearly trying to open new markets outside of UEFA but IMHO at the cost of the World Cups credability in many fans eyes. As the Champs league and European Championships(which also diverts the smaller european nations away from trying to host the WC) gain on the World Cup in terms of popularity FIFA return to hosts like Brazil and England would do much to remedy that IMHO.

Who would it be? 2014 is Brazil / Oz / Canada.

But 2018?
UK & Ireland? Spain & Portugal? Italy?

UK & Ireland
Wembley - 90.000
Croke - 83.000
Twickenham - 82.000
Old Trafford - 76.000
Millennium - 75.000
Murray - 67.500
Celtic Park - 60.506
New Arsenal - 60.000
New Anfield - 60.000
St. James - 53.000
Hampden - 51.000
Ibrox - 50.000
Stadium of Light - 49.000
City of Manchester - 48.000
Villa Park - 43.000
Stamford Bridge - 42.000
Goodison - 40.000
Elland Road - 40.000

Spain & Portugal
Nou Camp - 98.000
Bernabeu - 80.000
La Cortuja - 72.000
Da Luz - 66.000
Vicente Calderon - 58.000
Ruiz de Lopera - 56.000
Lluís Companys - 56.000
Sánchez Pizjuán - 55.000
Mestalla - 53.000
José Alvalade - 50.000
Do Dragão - 50.000
San Mamés - 40.000

Italy
San Siro - 86.000
Olimpico - 82.000
San Paolo - 78.000
Delle Alpi - 71.000
San Nicola - 58.000
Artemio Franchi - 47.000
San Filippo - 43.000
Friuli - 42.000
Luigi Ferraris - 42.000
Marc'Antonio Bentegodi - 42.000
Renato dall'Ara - 40.000
Sant'Elia - 40.000
(most of Italian need fierce renovations though)

So you are saying this about THE Olympics too, which have temporary seating as well

I really didn't want to say this but it does sound that u do not know alot about football, This is THE WORLD CUP not the Olympics, probably not ur fault though as Football is not the most popular sport in oz also the lack of qualifying makes it harder for aussies to understand the importance and tradition of the world cup.

Are u insane u cant have 5 football nations hosting the WC: ala UK & Eire.

I would say definately England, they would be the most prepared in my opinion, stadium wise. Spain probably the biggest threat, but they need a hell of a lot of work on their stadia, remeber all seats need to be under a roof.

^^ hahahhahaa that's true. Anyway, i guess it's time to England host a WC again. England or Spain.

Which european country should host the World Cup in 2018?

I'll start, deffo England, its about time!!!

UK and Ireland is a bloody stupid idea. Why should we have to do any kind of a joint bid with any other country? England can host it alone, without the Celtic Menace.

Brazil:

Rio de Janeiro - Jornalista Mário Filho (Maracanã) - 103.000
Belo Horizonte - Estádio Magalhães Pinto - 82.000
São Paolo - Cícero Pompeu de Toledo - 80.000
São Luís - Estádio João Castelo - 75.000
Uberlândia - Estádio João Havelange - 72.000
Fortaleza - Estádio Plácido Castelo - 69.000
Salvador - Estádio Octávio Mangabeira - 66.000
Recife - José do Rego Maciel - 66.000
Teresina - Governador Alberto Silva - 60.000
P. Prudente - Eduardo José Farah - 58.000
Porto Alegre - José Pinheiro Borda - 58.000
Curitiba - Major Antônio Couto Pereira - 57.000
S.J. Rio Preto - Estádio Benedito Teixeira - 55.000
Belém - Olímpico Edgard Proença - 55.000
Goiânia - Estádio Serra Dourada - 54.000
Porto Alegre - Olímpico Monumental - 51.000
Ribeirão Preto - Estádio Santa Cruz - 50.000
Uberaba - Estádio João Guido - 50.000
Varginha - Estádio Dilzon Melo - 50.000
Cuiabá - Governador José Fragelli - 47.000
Recife - Ademar da Costa Carvalho - 46.000
Brasília - Estádio Mané Garrincha - 45.000
Maceió - Estádio Rei Pelé - 45.000
Curitiba - Centro Poliesportivo Pinheiro - 45.000
Londrina - Estádio Jacy Scaff - 45.000
João Pessoa - J. Américo de Almeida Filho - 45.000
Campina Grande - Governador Ernami Satiro - 45.000
Campo Grande - Universitário P. Pedrossian - 45.000
Manaus - Estádio Vivaldo Lima - 43.000
Limeira - José Levy Sobrinho - 40.000

Wow.

^^ capacity isn't everything. particularly looking at those stadia, this is definately the case!

Why european?

Fifa's rotation policy?

Why european?

all world cups should be in europe. sharing it around da world iz all nice an' pimp-tight an' fair but da reality iz it makes fo' poor world cups. The last decent wc outside uh europe wuz Mexico 70. dere will never be another one just like mammy.

^^ Well i dont think that they al should be in Europe but at least every third rotation should be in Europe, fifa should not stay so strictly with this rotation policy as europe deserves more.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/images/smilies/previous.gifI know.

Btw; I don't see when Australia coulnd't host it, why China couldn't. They've got the capacity. All modern stadiums. Politics and sports shouldn't be woven but kept apart.

Beijing - Olympic - 90.000
Guangzhou - Guandong Stadium - 80.000
Shanghai - Shanghai Stadium - 80.000
Beijing - Workers Stadium - 72.000
Shenyang - Wulihe Stadium - 65.000
Wuhan - Wuhan Stadium - 60.000
Guangzhou - Tianhe Stadium - 60.000
Qingdao - Yizhong Center - 60.000
Chonqing - Olympic Sports Centre - 57.000
Dalian - People's Stadium - 55.000
Shenyang - Shenyang Sports Center - 55.000
Changsha - Helong Stadium - 55.000
Xi'an - Jiaodaruisun Stadium - 51.000
Hangzhou - Huanglong Stadium - 48.000
Jinan - Shandong Stadium - 44.000
Qingdao - Hongchen Stadium - 40.000
Chengdu - Sichuan Stadium - 40.000
Shaoguan - Shaoguan City Stadium - 40.000
Beijing - Olympic Sports Centre - 40.000
Kunming - Tuodong Stadium - 40.000
Lanzhou - Qilihe Stadium - 40.000
Chengdu - Chengdu Sports Center - 40.000
Hong Kong - Hong Kong Stadium - 40.000

Yeah, I like lists. Sue me.

all world cups should be in europe. sharing it around da world iz all nice an' pimp-tight an' fair but da reality iz it makes fo' poor world cups. The last decent wc outside uh europe wuz Mexico 70. dere will never be another one just like mammy.

Please complete school before your next post.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=338948

I am not sure if Europe gets it again until 2022.

Asia/Oceania - 2002
Europe - 2006
Africa - 2010
Americas - 2014
Asia/Oceania - 2018?
Europe - 2022?

^^ sorry mate that thread is just ridiculous, at least this one is more realistic and has a poll (directed at Martuh)

but if we's gots it in places like australia or south america or da states we's gots ta put up wiff silly smoke off times not ta mention poor stadiums an' great distances fo' da fans ta travel ta. if da wc wuz every 2 years then sure we's could spread it around uh bit mo' but every 4 years iz not very often so it has ta be done correctly an' dat means playing da games in decent stadiums at decent smoke off times wiff decent distances fo' da fans ta travel --EUROPE!!!!

Rotation system ends after 2014

Please complete school before your next post.

car park iz 2 words dohhh!

I am not sure if Europe gets it again until 2022.

Asia/Oceania - 2002
Europe - 2006
Africa - 2010
Americas - 2014
Asia/Oceania - 2018?
Europe - 2022?


Umm the general consensus is that it should or could be europe more often then other continents as there are alot more footballing nations in europe and are more prepared to host the world cup. also Europe is the Major continent for football, where traditions and cultures of football is kept alive, unlike certain others that i can mention (USA? JapanKorea?)

but if we's gots it in places like australia or south america or da states we's gots ta put up wiff silly smoke off times not ta mention poor stadiums an' great distances fo' da fans ta travel ta. if da wc wuz every 2 years then sure we's could spread it around uh bit mo' but every 4 years iz not very often so it has ta be done correctly an' dat means playing da games in decent stadiums at decent smoke off times wiff decent distances fo' da fans ta travel --EUROPE!!!!

Yu spake inglish veri gud yu kno???


Anyway, I think the 2018 World Cup should be in England, FIFA are ceasing their rotation policy after 2014, because without it Africa would have never got a world cup at all. The current FIFA boss says the 2018 World Cup should be in England as it is 'the home of football'

I really didn't want to say this but it does sound that u do not know alot about football, This is THE WORLD CUP not the Olympics, probably not ur fault though as Football is not the most popular sport in oz also the lack of qualifying makes it harder for aussies to understand the importance and tradition of the world cup.

Japan/Korea 2002 used temporary seating for some of their WC Stadia....

The current FIFA boss says the 2018 World Cup should be in England as it is 'the home of football'

w0rrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrd!!!!!!!!!

In China's case I'd guess there would be no shortage of funds to build new stadia if needed.

Japan/Korea 2002 used temporary seating for some of their WC Stadia....

Yeah and wot a legacy that left. NOT!

the main problem i have is that i think countries that want to host a world cup need to first establish football as a major sport in their country and not use the world cup to do this, cos the tournament then looses its true identity(USA?)

Hopefully Germany will show what the world cup is really about as most european countries have the passion instilled into them.

Indeed, the climate in Australia in June would actually be far more suitable for games than most world cups have been.
True..Brisbane,Sydney and Perth in the middle of "winter"(June/July) would have a similar climate to a German or English Summer.

Yu spake inglish veri gud yu kno???


Anyway, I think the 2018 World Cup should be in England, FIFA are ceasing their rotation policy after 2014, because without it Africa would have never got a world cup at all. The current FIFA boss says the 2018 World Cup should be in England as it is 'the home of football'

Ur not talkin bout sepp blatter are u? Then were dooooomed!!

Rotation system ends after 2014

Really? In that case my best chances of watching future WC football games will not be in Australia!

True..Brisbane,Sydney and Perth in the middle of "winter"(June/July) would have a similar climate to a German or English Summer.

sydney average temp in july iz 54 degrees

http://www.auinfo.com/sydney-climate.html

london average temp in july iz 72 degrees

http://uk.weather.com/weather/climatology/UKXX0085

ya iz jivin' out o' yo' ass Ya' dig?

Yeah and wot a legacy that left. NOT!

the main problem i have is that i think countries that want to host a world cup need to first establish football as a major sport in their country and not use the world cup to do this, cos the tournament then looses its true identity(USA?)

Hopefully Germany will show what the world cup is really about as most european countries have the passion instilled into them.

The average attendance at the Australian A-League is higher than the premier national leagues of
-Portugal
-Belgium
-Russia
-Sweden
-Korea
-Norway
-Denmark
-China
-Romania
-Greece
-Switzerland
and most Euro Leagues except obviously the big ones(England,Spain,Italy,Germany etc)

^^ i don't know wot that proves

Just have a look at past world cups. most of the european ones were the ones which stand out apart from Mexico probably.

No, I don't really think Australia has a strong chance of hosting the World Cup for a fair bit yet, maybe when she's bumped her population up a bit.

^^ i just don't know bout austrailia, it just to me looks like all the international sport events that they host (and host them very well) all end up very similar and there isn't the difference of an X factor in them. I dont want the world cup to be seen as a another 'thing' for the aussies to host.

sydney average temp in july iz 54 degrees

http://www.auinfo.com/sydney-climate.html

london average temp in july iz 72 degrees

http://uk.weather.com/weather/climatology/UKXX0085

ya iz jivin' out o' yo' ass Ya' dig?

You compared Sydney's AVE temp to Londons AVE MAX temp! ..Londons ave temp is not 72 deg,but 60degF.......its ave MAX temp is 72...Ave max temp in Sydney in winter is around 65degf

London is still warmer in summer than Sydney in winter.....but I was more thinking Brisbane compared to London and Sydney to Manchester......
Not a huge difference!!

^^ i don't know wot that proves

Just have a look at past world cups. most of the european ones were the ones which stand out apart from Mexico probably.

It probably doesnt prove much,but you keep pointing to a fact that Football is not popular in australia,because it isnt the No1 sport....
Even at no4 in this country,its more popular than many of you think..

Well, if the question is, could Australia host a world cup in 2014?...yes, I think they could, but they'd still need quite a lot of stadium work done, and the weather might be a bit against them. But, if the quetion is, do you they they will host it in 2014?...then I think no! The point here is that Australia is standing by as a back-up option, if South America fails, and even then they might consider USA over Aussie.

But either way, it makes no difference, they can all fight it out for 2014, as long as 2018 goes to England!!! :D

:cheers:

issues, in my opinion, that australia has to confront before it launches a world cup bid:

- there is a need for more 40,000+ stadiums in alternative locations to the ones currently available.
- there is a perceived over-reliance on cricket grounds, as opposed to purpose-built stadia.
- there is a possible conflict with domestic sports seasons which might affect stadia availability.
- possible domestic disinterest in the event?
- your beer is rubbish.

:)

^^ hahahhahaa that's true. Anyway, i guess it's time to England host a WC again.

well said. you have our support for 2014.

UK and Ireland is a bloody stupid idea. Why should we have to do any kind of a joint bid with any other country? England can host it alone, without the Celtic Menace.

:lol: correct!

issues, in my opinion, that australia has to confront before it launches a world cup bid:

- there is a need for more 40,000+ stadiums in alternative locations to the ones currently available.
- there is a perceived over-reliance on cricket grounds, as opposed to purpose-built stadia.
- there is a possible conflict with domestic sports seasons which might affect stadia availability.
- possible domestic disinterest in the event?
- your beer is rubbish.

:)

da bomb colt 45 in da world iz australian Ya' dig?


http://www.surf4wine.co.uk/Carlton_Cold.html

Shouldn't it be Asia's turn again in 2018?

Why have you put UK and Ireland, and Spain and Portugal together?????? That's just dam crazy! For starters, you'd never ever get a 5 country bid as ure suggesting with the UK and Ireland! The bids would be England, or Spain, cus neither would really need a partner country to co-host the event. England is looking the most likely option, cus they are nearly ready to host a World Cup right now, even without the big build that comes with a World Wup bid.

:cheers:

Shouldn't it be Asia's turn again in 2018?

no. next question.

da bomb colt 45 in da world iz australian Ya' dig?


http://www.surf4wine.co.uk/Carlton_Cold.html
k?

- there is a need for more 40,000+ stadiums in alternative locations to the ones currently available.

No doubt.....Canberra,Newcastle,Townsville would need to upgrade and Perth and Adelaide need to go from scratch.If this was acheived,we would have 19 Stadiums in 8 cities.....Fine!

- there is a perceived over-reliance on cricket grounds, as opposed to purpose-built stadia.

As above....therefore only 1 Cricket venue used...the 100,000 capacity MCG..


- there is a possible conflict with domestic sports seasons which might affect stadia availability.

AFL will get over it..

- possible domestic disinterest in the event?

you are kidding??..No chance of that!!..WC final of 2002 was the highest watch sporting event on Australian TV in 2002.Australia v Uruguay in 2005 WC playoff was attended by 85,000 people watched by )nearly)as many that watch the AFL or NRL Grand Final!



- your beer is rubbish.
ummmmmmm........no comment! LOL

no. next question.

Why? 06 Europe, 10 Africa, 14 South America...18 _____? What's the point in having this rotating system if it's not used?

Anyway, it'll probably be England's turn (although they stabbed us in the back for the 06 world cup). Spain hosted it in 82, England in 66 and I'd say England's got better venues to offer.

Why? 06 Europe, 10 Africa, 14 South America...18 _____? What's the point in having this rotating system if it's not used?

where in Asia do you think?

^^ Yer, I know what you mean there. Loads of events that Australia host these days are full of people saying 'it just proves we can host an amazing tournament'....and you just think Enough already! There is too much emphasis on it being a sporting 'event' for Australia to host, and trying to show to people how many great 'events' can be held there, instead of just getting on with the thing and and concentrating on the sport itself! But, having said that, I think Australia would host a pretty decent WC, someday in teh future, when there is more enthusiasm for football and the satdium situation has improed a bit more.

2018 has gotta go to England, no doubt! Did you know that these next two World Cups -South Africa and South Ameerica (poss) will be the first time in its history, that the World Cup has ever been held outside Europe twice in a row. So it's gotta go back to Europe in 2018, and especially to England, the home of football! :)

:cheers:

China. :dunno: The great thing about despotic regimes is that all the venues will be finished in time.

Anyway, it'll probably be England's turn (although they stabbed us in the back for the 06 world cup).
?? Who did England stab in the back for Wc 2006...??....and how...??

?? Who did England stab in the back for Wc 2006...??....and how...??

Germany supported England's 96 Euro bid and in return England promised to support our 06 wc bid. But then England decided to launch its own bid.

China. :dunno: The great thing about despotic regimes is that all the venues will be finished in time.

:lol:

and the rotation system ends after 2014.

Europe also has the worst crowd troubles out of any continent. Europe clearly does deserve to miss out for 16 years in my opinion. Football continually is tarnished because of hooligans in Europe.

And the fact you have the best leagues, the best players, best clubs, means you should be able to cope without a world cup in Europe for 16 years.


As for the world cup 2014, if Brazil is bidding, its a done deal Brazil will get it in my opinion. Especially if Australia makes a bid. South American confederation has alot(perhaps too much) influence.

Germany supported England's 96 Euro bid and in return England promised to support our 06 wc bid. But then England decided to launch its own bid.

Not quite correct. England bid for both EC96 and WC98. So did France. There was an agreement that England would withdraw from the 98 bid and France would withdraw from the EC96.

The FA decided that we'd staked our claim on the next European World Cup bid there was never any formal agreement with any other European nation.

Had the FA been quicker to organise (in hindsight, a futile hope) they should have been able to put a bid together long before Germany.

http://www.englandfootballonline.com/Comment/CommentWCBid.html

I don't know if it's a credible source but I think it's safe to say that the behavior was a bit weird.

Europe also has the worst crowd troubles out of any continent. Europe clearly does deserve to miss out for 16 years in my opinion. Football continually is tarnished because of hooligans in Europe.

have you been to a game in south america recently?

Europe also has the worst crowd troubles out of any continent. Europe clearly does deserve to miss out for 16 years in my opinion. Football continually is tarnished because of hooligans in Europe.

And the fact you have the best leagues, the best players, best clubs, means you should be able to cope without a world cup in Europe for 16 years.


As for the world cup 2014, if Brazil is bidding, its a done deal Brazil will get it in my opinion. Especially if Australia makes a bid. South American confederation has alot(perhaps too much) influence.

And in Brazil the mothers of famous players are regularly kidnapped. :|

Hooliganism used to be a problem but these days you can go to a game w/o any sort of fear. I don't know if the same can be said about football games in South America.

Its European leagues we keep hearing about with hooligans, match fixing, corruption etc, not South American leagues or anyone else.

Its European leagues we keep hearing about with hooligans, match fixing, corruption etc, not South American leagues or anyone else.

That's because European leagues are the most famous and most widely followed leagues. It's the same thing in politics. We know everything about American politics simply because it's the most powerful country.

Ever read any stories about what some African players have to go thru if they mess up?

From what I'v heard the trouble between clubs like Boca Jnr's and River Plate is far worse than anything you see in western europe these days.

hooligans don' bother innocent peeps anyway dey only fight amongst themselves, against other peeps wanting uh pimp-tight old fashioned slap dusting. football has far mo' important things ta trip about than uh few firms agreeing ta meet up fo' uh fight in the hood

http://www.englandfootballonline.com/Comment/CommentWCBid.html

I don't know if it's a credible source but I think it's safe to say that the behavior was a bit weird.

Yeah, that's a credible website but the author missed out the agreement with France which was more important than people often think.

The FA didn't use much common sense and really ought to have pulled out before the voting took place.

Still, 2018 looks rosy.

hooligans don' bother innocent peeps anyway dey only fight amongst themselves, against other peeps wanting uh pimp-tight old fashioned slap dusting. football has far mo' important things ta trip about than uh few firms agreeing ta meet up fo' uh fight in the hood

Speak english.

Does anyone know if Spain are considering a bid for 2018?

Does anyone know if Spain are considering a bid for 2018?

too racialist ta be awarded it you know das right

W0rd! A broda' can't play any ball widout monkey chants comin' fum de Spanish crowd. ah' mean whut's down wid dat?

sydney average temp in july iz 54 degrees

http://www.auinfo.com/sydney-climate.html

london average temp in july iz 72 degrees

http://uk.weather.com/weather/climatology/UKXX0085

ya iz jivin' out o' yo' ass Ya' dig?

I hope you didn't go to great lengths to convert those temps into Fahrenheit because there might be about one country in the world that still uses that scale.

^^ so the answer is no???

I'd say Belgium & Netherlands

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/images/smilies/previous.gifI know.

Btw; I don't see when Australia coulnd't host it, why China couldn't. They've got the capacity. All modern stadiums. Politics and sports shouldn't be woven but kept apart.

Beijing - Olympic - 90.000
Guangzhou - Guandong Stadium - 80.000
Shanghai - Shanghai Stadium - 80.000
Beijing - Workers Stadium - 72.000
Shenyang - Wulihe Stadium - 65.000
Wuhan - Wuhan Stadium - 60.000
Guangzhou - Tianhe Stadium - 60.000
Qingdao - Yizhong Center - 60.000
Chonqing - Olympic Sports Centre - 57.000
Dalian - People's Stadium - 55.000
Shenyang - Shenyang Sports Center - 55.000
Changsha - Helong Stadium - 55.000
Xi'an - Jiaodaruisun Stadium - 51.000
Hangzhou - Huanglong Stadium - 48.000
Jinan - Shandong Stadium - 44.000
Qingdao - Hongchen Stadium - 40.000
Chengdu - Sichuan Stadium - 40.000
Shaoguan - Shaoguan City Stadium - 40.000
Beijing - Olympic Sports Centre - 40.000
Kunming - Tuodong Stadium - 40.000
Lanzhou - Qilihe Stadium - 40.000
Chengdu - Chengdu Sports Center - 40.000
Hong Kong - Hong Kong Stadium - 40.000

Yeah, I like lists. Sue me.

Hmm....except Hong Kong stadium, I think ALL these stadia has running tracks :down:

I think Blatter only wants Brazil to sweat it out and work for it and not simply sit around, knowing that the 2014 tournament will just be given to them.

The tournament absorbs so much of a countries resources that I really think Brazil should look to co-host with a local neighbour themselves, to spread and manage the resources a bit.

Personally, I think it would be a good idea if Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay put in a combined joint bid for South America. This is possible, given the set-up of the CSF group stages, Brazil and Argentina always qualify, mostly by finishing 1st and 2nd in the top 4 or 5 qualifying slots, so co-hosting will not be a problem in this instance.

Uruguay, could also be an automatic qualifier as host, but not necessarily seeded, given their form of late.

I think this would make a memorable world cup- the GREATS of South America if you like, having each won it at least twice. Also, it will be decades before the tournament returns to SA giving another one of those countries the chance to host.

I don't think an Argentina/Chile bid would be enough either, because a tournament of that size (double the participants since Argentina 1978) would cripple their respective economies.

Argentina could provide 4 or 5 good stadia in a GREATS of SA bid. The Ciudad de la Plata, built in 2003 is a wonderful stadium, they would just need new stadiums in Corduba, Rosario and Mar del Plata.

Uruguay could build a new stadium in Montevideo, plus one more. This would lessen the strain on Brazil who would only need to provide 7 or 8 good quality stadia instead of 10 or 12.

Anybody agree?

I dont think we'll see co-hosts anytime soon.

I'd say Belgium & Netherlands

I can only agree :cheers:

too racialist ta be awarded it you know das right
:weird:

Australia won't host the world cup, there is even a thread about this- utterly pointless. It may be progressive, influential and have (limited) resources, but as Lost Boy has pointed out, there are too few people living there. Come on, can you anyone honestly see a 40,000+ going up in Alice Springs???

and my vote is England, possibly incorporating Hamden Park and Millenium Stadium to give it national backing and importance.

p.s. Greece!!??

No. I and many others will be against it, if it is a joint British Bid. We do not need the Celts watering down a chance to show of England; besides they would not want to be a part of it.

Greece doesn't have a chance, can't even host a EC. UK would be good, better then England because of more and bigger stadiums.

It would be bloody stupid. Most joint bids (being discouraged anyway by FIFA) are even sided (an equal participation in both countries), that could not happen in any UK Bid.

England would provide 10-12 Stadia, Scotland and Wales one, and for that massive contribution both would get an automatic qualification place in a UK Bid. Can you not appreciate how fantastically stupid that would be?

Greece doesn't have a chance, can't even host a EC. UK would be good, better then England because of more and bigger stadiums.

I only put Greece cos i couldn't think of any other european country, And there would NEVER be a UK bid and it shouldn't be allowed, only England from the Uk can host it IMO.

Australia won't host the world cup, there is even a thread about this- utterly pointless. It may be progressive, influential and have (limited) resources, but as Lost Boy has pointed out, there are too few people living there. Come on, can you anyone honestly see a 40,000+ going up in Alice Springs???
^^ Ignorance at it's best ^^ . . . Alice Springs???

If you're worried about attendances then let me put your mind to rest...

2000 Olympics - 8mil people attended (best ever apparently) :)
2006 Commie Games - 1.8mil attended (double the previous best Manchester)
2003 Rugby WC - Cricket WC etc...etc...

Come on now, to argue stadiums is one thing but population?

I dont want the world cup to be seen as a another 'thing' for the aussies to host. Loads of events that Australia host these days are full of people saying 'it just proves we can host an amazing tournament'....and you just think Enough already! There is too much emphasis on it being a sporting 'event' for Australia to host, and trying to show to people how many great 'events' can be held there, instead of just getting on with the thing and and concentrating on the sport itself!
It seems as though being a sports loving nation is seen a bad thing to some people. Well I ain't gonna apologize for that.

btw . . . here's a news flash. The World Cup is an "event". Do you think nations would bid so hard if these "events" didn't promote their countries internationally, encourage tourism or any other form of economic gain? If it was just for the love of the game then why do most countries wait for these events to build their stadias?

The average attendance at the Australian A-League is higher than the premier national leagues of
-Portugal
-Belgium
-Russia
-Sweden
-Korea
-Norway
-Denmark
-China
-Romania
-Greece
-Switzerland
and most Euro Leagues except obviously the big ones(England,Spain,Italy,Germany etc)

It's true

Australia WILL host the soccer World Cup either sooner or later. That is a given.

These Pommies other Johnny Foreigners are doing their most to undermine it for their selfish reasons but if we have to we would move a mountain to make it happen.

The most pathetic excuse is that cricket grounds are not good at hosting soccer matches. Just tell that to anyone who went to the World Cup qualifier in 1997. That single night was the tipping point in the history of Australian soccer where it kicked the door down into the mainstream sports universe. It could not go back after that. It touched simply too many people. Just like the Titanic disaster.

The World Cup is not something Australia (or any other nation) has a 'right' to host.

Australia WILL host the soccer World Cup either sooner or later. That is a given.

These Pommies other Johnny Foreigners are doing their most to undermine it for their selfish reasons but if we have to we would move a mountain to make it happen.

"doing our most to undermine it for selfish reasons", like it's a conspiracy or something!? this isn't braveheart - you're not oppressed - if your bid isn't good enough, your bid isn't good enough. stop being a self-pitying, nationalist knob.

The most pathetic excuse is that cricket grounds are not good at hosting soccer matches. Just tell that to anyone who went to the World Cup qualifier in 1997. That single night was the tipping point in the history of Australian soccer where it kicked the door down into the mainstream sports universe. It could not go back after that. It touched simply too many people. Just like the Titanic disaster.

:lol: yeah, just like the titanic disaster :lol:

:lol: yeah, just like the titanic disaster :lol:
You have no idea . . . That night was devastating especially when leading 2-0 and in a seemingly comfortable position only to have conceded 2 late goals and miss out on the away goals rule.

It still burns today . . . Venebles should have shut up shop at 2-0 :bash:

maybe greece-turkey joint bid. greece is in europe and turkey half in europe half in asian minor. it would great to see these 2 rivals host something together. 6 stadiums in each country would be perfect!!!

You have no idea . . . That night was devastating especially when leading 2-0 and in a seemingly comfortable position only to have conceded 2 late goals and miss out on the away goals rule.

It still burns today . . . Venebles should have shut up shop at 2-0 :bash:

i have no idea!? welcome to competitive international football: from alf ramsey subbing charlton and all after being 2-0 up to west germany in the 1970 world cup quarter-final (so they'd be fresh for the semis), only to then go on to lose the game 3-2 aet, to the hand of god in '86, the germans cruelly winning on penalties in 1990 (waddle hit the post in extra time) and 1996 (macca hit the post in extra time, gazza should've sealed it), to the argies doing the same in '98 (campbell's goal was never a shearer foul), and sven not going at the brazilians in 2002 and the portuguese in 2004 (again, campbell's goal was never a foul), when we could have really given both of them a good hiding. that's football. deal with it.

just don't tell me i have no idea! i'm english - i've suffered!

just don't tell me i have no idea! i'm english - i've suffered!
lol . . . fair enough :)

What I meant was that many people disregard football/soccer importance in this country because atm it's regarded as the 4th football code but what they don't know is the huge latent supporter base it has. For many decades Soccer Australia have systematically decimated the national league with their petty infighting and incompetence which lead to the formation of the new FFA and the A-League last year with huge success. Yet the one thing that has stood the test of time has been the popularity of the national team. The last six games at the MCG alone haven't yielded a crowd less that 70k and the Greece game in May sold out in two hours.

As I said . . . losing to Iran still burns today.

It would be bloody stupid. Most joint bids (being discouraged anyway by FIFA) are even sided (an equal participation in both countries), that could not happen in any UK Bid.

England would provide 10-12 Stadia, Scotland and Wales one, and for that massive contribution both would get an automatic qualification place in a UK Bid. Can you not appreciate how fantastically stupid that would be?

Do all English people say the word bloody??? Or is that just a stereotype????

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2006/soccer/04/15/brazi.worldcup.ap/index.html

Brazil on track to host 2014 WC
Posted: Saturday April 15, 2006 12:50PM; Updated: Saturday April 15, 2006 12:50PM

SAO PAULO, Brazil (AP) -- The Brazilian Soccer Confederation remains optimistic about the country's chances of hosting the 2014 World Cup despite recent criticism by FIFA president Sepp Blatter.

Blatter told Brazilian media earlier this week Brazil does not have any stadiums in adequate condition to host matches in soccer's showcase.

But Ricardo Teixeira, president of Brazil's confederation, said that can easily change in time for the tournament in 2014. He said Brazil's private sector would be more than capable of helping the country build new stadiums and properly prepare for a World Cup.

"The World Cup is an event that rewards those who want to invest," Teixeira told sports daily Lance on Saturday. "And there's never a shortage of investors interested in soccer in Brazil."

Teixeira said he was not disappointed with Blatter's remarks, and thanked him for his input.

"I'll write a letter to congratulate him," Teixeira said. "What he said served as an alert, not only to me, but to all Brazilians. We need to do our homework and get organized."

Soccer's world governing body rotates the award of the World Cup around its member confederations. With South Africa hosting the event in 2010, South America is in line for 2014.

^^^^^^^^^^^^

Oh, okay a Brazilian politician says that everything is working perfectly.

Personally I would not even believe an Australian, American or a British politician and they are borderline honest some of the time.

Bob Da Builder- shut up

It would be bloody stupid. Most joint bids (being discouraged anyway by FIFA) are even sided (an equal participation in both countries), that could not happen in any UK Bid.

England would provide 10-12 Stadia, Scotland and Wales one, and for that massive contribution both would get an automatic qualification place in a UK Bid. Can you not appreciate how fantastically stupid that would be?

The only way I could see that happening is if those at the top of FIFA deside they want it to and award the WC to us after backstage political maneuvering rather than though a bid process. I could however see an English bid that incorperated a few Welsh/Scottish stadiums without them as actual hosts(maybe altering the draw slightly so they can to play in their own stadiums should they qualify) happening.

^^ Ignorance at it's best ^^ . . . Alice Springs???

If you're worried about attendances then let me put your mind to rest...

2000 Olympics - 8mil people attended (best ever apparently) :)
2006 Commie Games - 1.8mil attended (double the previous best Manchester)
2003 Rugby WC - Cricket WC etc...etc...

Come on now, to argue stadiums is one thing but population?


It seems as though being a sports loving nation is seen a bad thing to some people. Well I ain't gonna apologize for that.

btw . . . here's a news flash. The World Cup is an "event". Do you think nations would bid so hard if these "events" didn't promote their countries internationally, encourage tourism or any other form of economic gain? If it was just for the love of the game then why do most countries wait for these events to build their stadias?


I just don't like the idea of using the tournament to spread the sport in the country that is hosting it, the country that is hosting it should have a history of the sport, a passion and a tradition. tournaments such as USA 94 was a crap tournament as it was used as an 'Advertisement' of the sport to the american people, rather then THE WORLD CUP. this is all nonsense, football is the worlds biggest sport it doesn't need all that 'advertising' the sport is too commercialised already.

About Austrailia, other countries are more deserving in hosting the world cup.

The World Cup is not something Australia (or any other nation) has a 'right' to host.

Nobody is saying that.

^^^^^^^^^^

One in twenty Aussies is an officially registered soccer player. They don't really need to "spread" the code in Australia I can assure you of that.

The reason why it is only now gathering strength in Oz is a lot to do with politics both down here and internationally. But we wouldn't expect a Johnny Foreigner to know that.

I just don't like the idea of using the tournament to spread the sport in the country that is hosting it, the country that is hosting it should have a history of the sport, a passion and a tradition. tournaments such as USA 94 was a crap tournament as it was used as an 'Advertisement' of the sport to the american people, rather then THE WORLD CUP. this is all nonsense, football is the worlds biggest sport it doesn't need all that 'advertising' the sport is too commercialised already.

About Austrailia, other countries are more deserving in hosting the world cup.

USA 94 was far from crap
1. highest revenues for FIFA
2. largest crowds...
3. television coverage and other revenues made FIFA very happy
4. 2002 the US teams performance was certainly a positive result.

If you're worried about attendances then let me put your mind to rest...

2000 Olympics - 8mil people attended (best ever apparently) :)
2006 Commie Games - 1.8mil attended (double the previous best Manchester)
2003 Rugby WC - Cricket WC etc...etc...

Come on now, to argue stadiums is one thing but population?



FACT- the last 5 world cups not including Germany have been hosted by nations of a population of 58 million plus. This is a massive tournament that requires massive resources. FACT

South Africa (40 million) is the exception to the rule, given that they are the first nation of a soccer-mad continent to be given the chance, as well as providing outstanding facilities.

Don't wish to rain on your parade, but Australia doesn't have the population or resources. You only have 5 cities of over 1 million, I cannot see you financing, providing, managing and maintaining 10 to 12 stadia upto FIFA regulations.

STOP comparing the FIFA World Cup to the Sydney Olympics and the Commonwealth games, these are localised sport events focused around an individual city and are of lesser significance (certainly the commonwealth games come nowhere near).

With regards to Rugby and Cricket, trust you Aussies to bring these ones into an example- no comparison, don't even go there!

Also Australia is 10 hours ahead of GMT, making it impractical for European and US/South American TV network audiances.

Know what? Perhaps the Aussies could host the world cup.
Perhaps Chelsea can fill a 65,000 seater week in week out and surpass Arsenal and Tottenham as the best supported club in London.

Miracles have been known to happen....

It seems like some people seem to think Australia has a right to host the WC becasue it's Australia.

While I support taking the WC to non-traditional footballing powers this should not be a sympathy vote. It should only be because the bid is outstanding.

USA 94 was far from crap
1. highest revenues for FIFA
2. largest crowds...
3. television coverage and other revenues made FIFA very happy
4. 2002 the US teams performance was certainly a positive result.

I think he meant it was a dull tournament. If you need reminding then I suggest you watch a video of the final.

USA 94 was far from crap
1. highest revenues for FIFA
2. largest crowds...
3. television coverage and other revenues made FIFA very happy
4. 2002 the US teams performance was certainly a positive result.

94 was hopeless. Dress it up with any statistics you like, the whole competition had no soul. It was a plastic World Cup and a dismal failure.

Don't wish to rain on your parade, but Australia doesn't have the population or resources. You only have 5 cities of over 1 million, I cannot see you financing, providing, managing and maintaining 10 to 12 stadia upto FIFA regulations.

STOP comparing the FIFA World Cup to the Sydney Olympics and the Commonwealth games, these are localised sport events focused around an individual city and are of lesser significance (certainly the commonwealth games come nowhere near).


Couldn't they

Couldn't they

Well, if you put it like that...you've won me over.

Couldn't they

At least the government could spend the 10 Billion dollar surplus on something worthwhile

It seems like some people seem to think Australia has a right to host the WC becasue it's Australia.

While I support taking the WC to non-traditional footballing powers this should not be a sympathy vote. It should only be because the bid is outstanding.

It would be better than Brazils is shaping up as

Soon the national teams won't be able to afford the insurance of these players. Also, with the big Eurpoean clubs starting to make noises about wanting their players paid for when they're off playing for their countries, hopefully we'll soon reach a stage where International football is either dead or in the least, an under 25 sport.

The semi-finals of the World Cup is infinitely inferior to the semi-finals of the Champions League, as it is. Why should our top clubs loan out their prize assets for 2 months in the summer for such a second rate competition? International football simply beggars belief and thankfully, won't be around as we know it, in 15 years time.

I think hosting tournaments in "developing football nations" like America, Japan and Korea, has merit, football is a growing sport in Japan, and even though many Americans may still deride it, increasingly their children now play it, and MLS is in a situation where clubs are even getting football specific stadia being built for them with capacities at 20 - 30,000, unthinkable a few years before the 1994 World Cup, and quite impressive considering just how embedded the traditional three team sports are there, and the xenophobia in both Japan and the USA.

That said, although its nice to spread the word, its not neccessary, its still the world game, and is growing fast in places like China without the World Cup, and the threat to FIFA is the resurgence in wealth and interest of Domestic Football Leagues. What is the benefit of spreading the World Cup to Australia, what is to be benefitted from the new pastures there, - a lousy 20 million people - where the sports of AFL, Rugby Union, Rugby League, Cricket and Misplaced Bragging, are not going to be replaced by Football anytime soon. In return we get, inappropiate cricket stadia and others which will surely never be used again, a lack of interest by the hosting citizens, anti-social hours for the rest of us and the World Cup is reduced to nothing more than another notch in the bed post of the Lucky Country.

I just don't see what Australia can possibly bring to the World Cup.

lol . . . fair enough :)

What I meant was that many people disregard football/soccer importance in this country because atm it's regarded as the 4th football code but what they don't know is the huge latent supporter base it has. For many decades Soccer Australia have systematically decimated the national league with their petty infighting and incompetence which lead to the formation of the new FFA and the A-League last year with huge success. Yet the one thing that has stood the test of time has been the popularity of the national team. The last six games at the MCG alone haven't yielded a crowd less that 70k and the Greece game in May sold out in two hours.

As I said . . . losing to Iran still burns today.

fair enough. i should probably put a wink after my posts, i just re-read my last two and i sound like a miserable little shit! :lol:

bob, apologies, i was a bit harsh on you - i could've made my point in a more civilised manner. :pet:

Soon the national teams won't be able to afford the insurance of these players. Also, with the big Eurpoean clubs starting to make noises about wanting their players paid for when they're off playing for their countries, hopefully we'll soon reach a stage where International football is either dead or in the least, an under 25 sport.

The semi-finals of the World Cup is infinitely inferior to the semi-finals of the Champions League, as it is. Why should our top clubs loan out their prize assets for 2 months in the summer for such a second rate competition? International football simply beggars belief and thankfully, won't be around as we know it, in 15 years time.

What the hell? The World Cup is a pretty special event. Sure, clubs like Barca or Chelsea might have all-star teams that could take on many nations but a world cup isn't just about the quality of play. For 4 weeks bragging rights between nations are on the line, to this day the 54 world cup win is regarded as a historic event here in Germany (and the 74 world cup has left a deep scar on the psyche of some Dutchmen).

What the hell? The World Cup is a pretty special event. Sure, clubs like Barca or Chelsea might have all-star teams that could take on many nations but a world cup isn't just about the quality of play. For 4 weeks bragging rights between nations are on the line, to this day the 54 world cup win is regarded as a historic event here in Germany (and the 74 world cup has left a deep scar on the psyche of some Dutchmen).

Correct. But when the nations aren't allowed to choose their best players (and this will rightly happen sooner rather than later) the whole thing will become largely pointless, almost Olympic-like, where most sides will contain young up-and-coming players rather than established stars.

I'm a Manchester United fan and the sooner we can rest up players like Rooney, Ferdinand, Ronaldo, Neville and the like, instead of sending them off playing for their country and risking burnout and injury, the better.

Thankfully, the day is not far off when the law will enable clubs to protect their assets.

Lostboy]considering just how embedded the traditional three team sports are there, and the xenophobia in both Japan and the USA.

A Brit saying Americans and Japanease xenophobic when it come to sports!!! Thats rich!! :cheers:

between those 4 - England or Greece

Thing is, to you Aussies, the World Cup is just another franchise, nothing more. You simply cannot grasp the bigger picture.

Okay you have got 5 great stadia, like the MCG, Suncorp, Telstra Dome, Telstra Stadium and the Sydney Football ground, but that's it.

The likes of Perth, Adelaide and Hobart have inadequate facilities and yes- you will be forced to use the likes of Newcastle, Darwin and Alice Springs as host cities.

Sounds like a joke to be frank

94 was hopeless. Dress it up with any statistics you like, the whole competition had no soul. It was a plastic World Cup and a dismal failure.


sorry, I think the stats that Mo showed you were likely music to FIFA's ears. Were the crowds as good as they would be in soccer mad nations? Not really. Great TV ratings, largest ticket sales, an unprecedented collection of huge and quality stadiums, sell outs, exposure to a nation of 300 million people. All in all a pretty good result.

The only complaint might be the dormancy of the fans. Money trumps all though (especially to FIFA).

A world Cup final held in the day, not under lights. A crime.

Has some thread with research to know where goes to be WC 2014?
it puts the page for me there! please!
Thanks!

^^^^^^^^^^^^

Oh, okay a Brazilian politician says that everything is working perfectly.

Personally I would not even believe an Australian, American or a British politician and they are borderline honest some of the time.

:hahaha: :hahaha: :hahaha: :hahaha: :hahaha: :hahaha:

Honest politicians?? What world are you living in mate??

USA 94 was far from crap
1. highest revenues for FIFA
2. largest crowds...
3. television coverage and other revenues made FIFA very happy
4. 2002 the US teams performance was certainly a positive result.

I think u kinda proved my point. fifa just wanted to reach out and 'comercialise' the event to more people, all about 'advertisement' and money. not much about football :bash:

Thing is to the English, it was very souless because after the almost of Italia '90, we didn't even manage to qualify, we're naturally prejudiced against it. Would be interesting to get the opinion of non-English on FIFA '94. I think it was a relatively successful tournament.

^^ err no, KoreaJapan was similar, although much better then USA or should i say, the "coca cola World cup"

USA'94 was a good World Cup in my opinion. Most of the football was crap but you can't blame the hosts for that. I might be biased because it was the first World Cup I remember watching but I have some fond memories about it. Getting up in the middle of the night to watch The Netherlands - Saudi Arabia, beating Ireland 2-0 thanks to a huge mistake by Pat Bonner and a heartbreaking 3-2 defeat against Brazil in the quarters.

The reason the English hate it because they weren't there. Bless you, Ronald Koeman :cheers:

Thing is to the English, it was very souless because after the almost of Italia '90, we didn't even manage to qualify, we're naturally prejudiced against it. Would be interesting to get the opinion of non-English on FIFA '94. I think it was a relatively successful tournament.

I wouldnt say 94 was a failiure but I do think theres only so often you can go to the well when it comes to using the WC to promote the game in new territories before it starts to erode the prestige of the event in both the fans and players eyes. As I said in the 2014 thread I think the growth of the club game (and the european championships) might force FIFA to bring the WC back to the tradisional centers of the game.

I don't know why is even Portugal there... For much as i'd like to, a WC is too much for a country like Portugal, despite having such new stadia.

What is the benefit of spreading the World Cup to Australia, what is to be benefitted from the new pastures there, - a lousy 20 million people - where the sports of AFL, Rugby Union, Rugby League, Cricket and Misplaced Bragging, are not going to be replaced by Football anytime soon. lol . . . Maybe if so called experts like yourself would stop telling us we can't do things then maybe we wouldn't have to remind you of it afterwards.

In return we get, inappropiate cricket stadia and others which will surely never be used again As someone stated before, a possible three non rectangular stadiums would be used - no different to most tournaments and the rest will be used again as they double up as rugby stadiums.

a lack of interest by the hosting citizens You seriously have NFI.

anti-social hours for the rest of us and the World Cup is reduced to nothing more than another notch in the bed post of the Lucky Country. Is that your biggest whine that you might have to wake up a little earlier to watch a game? Well welcome to our world - we've been doing it forever and it won't kill you.

btw . . . our anti-social hours are just perfect for half the worlds population.

I just don't see what Australia can possibly bring to the World Cup. A very successful tournament???

I don't know why is even Portugal there... For much as i'd like to, a WC is too much for a country like Portugal, despite having such new stadia.

basically i was struggling for countries outside of England and Spain

I understand, but having a bigger number of stadiums with a bigger capacity is just too much for our general football attendance. And it's way too early to make changes to our new stadiums so they can withstand more people.

The likes of Perth, Adelaide and Hobart have inadequate facilities and yes- you will be forced to use the likes of Newcastle, Darwin and Alice Springs as host cities.

Sounds like a joke to be frank

Why would we use Alice Springs? It's got about 28,000 people - you could fit the whole town's population and still have plenty of empty seats, because it's just about the most isolated place in the country. It's only close to Uluru and a secret US intelligence base.

Don't forget that Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane all have several smaller cities within two hours that are always shadowed by their larger neighbours.


2018 would be possible, but remote for Australia IMO. 2022 could be quite viable, especially since by then, a lot of stadium construction would have been well underway. If it took only the single inaugural season of the A-League to create enough demand for a new stadium in Melbourne, a lot can be done in 16 years.

The winning nation should host it. If that means a smaller World Cup one year, then so be it.

Just wondering what you think of this. How about having a single elimination tournament where the better seeded team hosts the game, but no single country hosts the tournament....... Kind of the like playoffs in the US.... That's a view from a person with very little knowledge of the World Cup.......

I dont think Australia should host 2018 world cup because as stated by others, it would mean 16 years for WC away from europe. So I say England 2018 but Australia should bid for 2022.
You shouldn't think of Australia as 20 million people because FIFA rightly sees it for all intensive purposes as part of Asia. In TV terms, when Australians are waking up at 3am to watch Germany06, so will the chinese, Japanese, Korean and other Asian fans. An Australian world cup would be in an ideal timezone to reach the east asian audience that holds so much potential for FIFA.

I dont think Australia should host 2018 world cup because as stated by others, it would mean 16 years for WC away from europe. So I say England 2018 but Australia should bid for 2022.
You shouldn't think of Australia as 20 million people because FIFA rightly sees it for all intensive purposes as part of Asia. In TV terms, when Australians are waking up at 3am to watch Germany06, so will the chinese, Japanese, Korean and other Asian fans. An Australian world cup would be in an ideal timezone to reach the east asian audience that holds so much potential for FIFA.

Even though most of the world's population lives closer to Australia's time zone (contrary to what you euros might think) australia just doesn't seem right to me. It might be beacuse the nation itslef only has 20 million people and only a few large cities capable of sustaining 40 000+ stadiums.

Hears the deal Englanders. We'll support you lot for 2018 if yous promise to talk up Australia over China for 2022. Think of it as a protest if China haven't sorted out human rights abuses by then. Japanese/Koreans/Indians and others would be less reluctant to visit Australia than China which is hostile to Japan.
I think China would host a better World Cup the next time its Asias turn like 2034/2040 or something.
Also, by 2020, i think football will be probably number 2 code in Aust. We would take it seriously and give the game the centre stage it deserves.

England for 2018!!!

It's been long enough, and they surely have the facilities and interest. The only problem could be England's soccer hoons, but they manage to go to every world cup wherever it is so that cannot be avoided anyway.

It would be nice if the 2018 world cup would be held in one of the ex eastern block countries, such as Czech republic, Slovakia, Poland, Ukrain, Rusia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria or a combination of two or more of these countries. These countries deserve it and I gurantee you would have a much better world cup than in say Germany or England. By the way I doubt North America will get a world cup anytime soon because part of the deal to get the 94 cup America had to set up a Soccer league(MLS), unfourtunetly this league is not doing so well and has never turned a profit.

It would be nice if the 2018 world cup would be held in one of the ex eastern block countries, such as Czech republic, Slovakia, Poland, Ukrain, Rusia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria or a combination of two or more of these countries. These countries deserve it and I gurantee you would have a much better world cup than in say Germany or England. By the way I doubt North America will get a world cup anytime soon because part of the deal to get the 94 cup America had to set up a Soccer league(MLS), unfourtunetly this league is not doing so well and has never turned a profit.

The World Cup is supposed to be fun for the fans! I think I'd rather go and watch it in Iraq than any of those godforsaken grey and dreary hell holes.

^^^^^^^^^

At least Iraq has plenty of sun. Those Eastern European nations do have a disproportionate amount of incredibly attractive women, or maybe I had too much of the local brews whilst visiting!

It would be nice if the 2018 world cup would be held in one of the ex eastern block countries, such as Czech republic, Slovakia, Poland, Ukrain, Rusia, Hungary, Romania, Bulgaria or a combination of two or more of these countries. These countries deserve it and I gurantee you would have a much better world cup than in say Germany or England. By the way I doubt North America will get a world cup anytime soon because part of the deal to get the 94 cup America had to set up a Soccer league(MLS), unfourtunetly this league is not doing so well and has never turned a profit.

I doubt we'll see that(well maybe Russia) as those nations can also go for the european championships which are much more inline with their resources when it comes to stadiums.

Hears the deal Englanders. We'll support you lot for 2018 if yous promise to talk up Australia over China for 2022. Think of it as a protest if China haven't sorted out human rights abuses by then.

you have yourself a deal, my friend. let the former members of the british empire vote in unison to ensure the delivery of this great footballing event throughout our commonwealth. :okay:

Greece doesn't have a chance, can't even host a EC. UK would be good, better then England because of more and bigger stadiums.


Greece hosted the Olympic games which is a huge event but as we don't have so many big stadiums and mostly because we don't need them, I'd vote for Spain which is a very nice country with warn and sunny weather and foremost capable of hosting an event of this calibre.

I agree, I can't imagine the World Cup being hosted in Greece - just not got a big enough league and population, besides Basketball is almost as big as Football there, if my understanding is right? You did however host a superb Olympics, I wish it came to Greece more often.

I agree, I can't imagine the World Cup being hosted in Greece - just not got a big enough league and population, besides Basketball is almost as big as Football there, if my understanding is right? You did however host a superb Olympics, I wish it came to Greece more often.

Oh yes let's let the wonderful Greeks hold more Olympics so that these idiots can poison all the strays and send gangs around with iron bars to break their backs leaving these dogs to endure slow, painful deaths. The Greeks should never be allowed to host an Olympics ever again. In fact, they should be banned from competing for the next 50 years as punishment. Scum.

THOUSANDS of cats and dogs have died agonising deaths from poisoning on the streets and beach fronts of Athens in the run-up to the Summer Olympics

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/07/11/wdogs11.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/07/11/ixworld.html

http://www.moggies.co.uk/articles/2003/greek_tragedy.html

http://www.idausa.org/athens/Athens_Dogs_Cats_NE.jpg

^right Bubomb....

anyway it better be England for 2018 as we deserve it more than any other European nation and i'll cry if we don't (i dont want to be an old has been when they do finally reach our shore!).

I think we have a very good chance of getting it, and I know you were only joking, but I think our biggest fallback is the way we automatically think we're entitled to it, just because we invented the game, and its been a while since we've hosted it. We'll need to have a better bid than Spain if we're going to get it. Emotional claims to being the "home of football" (when at the same time we make the boast of it being the "world's sport) really isn't going to do anything for any of the FIFA Delegates voting.

We've got other excellent reasons for hosting it, better to play on these.

Hears the deal Englanders. We'll support you lot for 2018 if yous promise to talk up Australia over China for 2022. Think of it as a protest if China haven't sorted out human rights abuses by then. Japanese/Koreans/Indians and others would be less reluctant to visit Australia than China which is hostile to Japan.
I think China would host a better World Cup the next time its Asias turn like 2034/2040 or something.
Also, by 2020, i think football will be probably number 2 code in Aust. We would take it seriously and give the game the centre stage it deserves.

Thats fine by me :)

I'd vote for Spain which is a very nice country with warn and sunny weather and foremost capable of hosting an event of this calibre.
Spain is deffinitely not foremost capable of hosting an event of this calibre! England, despite it's very unpredictable climate and weather conditions, is far more suited to holding sporting events then Spain, for lots of deifferent reasons, such as bigger budgets, better organisation, more support, higher number of higher quality stadiums, and a severe lack of racist football supporters when compared to Spain. I don't have anything against Spain here btw, I'm just stating the facts of the matter.

:cheers:

^^ I wouldn't crticise them soo heavily, i just think their stadia ain't good enough

Spain is deffinitely not foremost capable of hosting an event of this calibre! England, despite it's very unpredictable climate and weather conditions, is far more suited to holding sporting events then Spain, for lots of deifferent reasons, such as bigger budgets, better organisation, more support, higher number of higher quality stadiums, and a severe lack of racist football supporters when compared to Spain. I don't have anything against Spain here btw, I'm just stating the facts of the matter.

:cheers:

The weather in England is far superior to that of Spain (or anywhere else in the world come to that) with regards football. It's perfect for it.

like i said before greece and turkey joint bid. europe/asia minor

u know which country should host the WC..........Iraq! or Afgan! they can use one of the crators caused by the bombs!

u know which country should host the WC..........Iraq! or Afgan! they can use one of the crators caused by the bombs!

It would probably get awsem TV ratings, I know I would be watching......on my TV from far away :)

Football should come home again in 2018. A World Cup in England will certainly be long overdue by then. England last hosted the World Cup in 1966, meaning by 2018 it will have been 52 years. When you consider that Germany hosted the World Cup just over 30 years ago and are now hosting it again, I think that it's only fair it returns to England.

true

^^ I agree. It's the perfect timing and motif to get some brand new stadia like you are doing.

I don't know much about the World Cup, but my City, Indianapolis, is seriously considering going after some portion of the event. We are currently building a 70,000 seat retractable roof stadium in our downtown and I know the Sports Corporation is looking to the World Cup to boost our international profile.

Hehehehe, England is seriously updating its stadium situation at the moment, with new Wembley, Emirates Stadium, Old Traford expansion, Twickenham expansion, plans for a new Liverpool stadium, plans for a new Birmingham stadium....and it aint even in a World Cup bid!!!

English, you'll never change...:sleepy:

^^ do u want to clarify?

With regard to hosting the World Cup, in most respects, there's little to choose between England and Spain.

However, the main reason why England, and not Spain, should be the next European country to host the World Cup is that England last hosted the World Cup in 1966 and Spain last hosted the World Cup in 1982.

No need for further debate on the matter.

^^ do u want to clarify?


Is It necesary to clarify? :runaway:

Is It necesary to clarify? :runaway:
Errr...yer it is! All the dude said was "English, you'll never change"....I mean wtf??? What is that suppoosed to mean...change how...? Either he's talkin shit, or making a joke that I don't really get...? So yer, it is neccessary to clarify!

:cheers:

With regard to hosting the World Cup, in most respects, there's little to choose between England and Spain.

However, the main reason why England, and not Spain, should be the next European country to host the World Cup is that England last hosted the World Cup in 1966 and Spain last hosted the World Cup in 1982.

No need for further debate on the matter.

Unlike the Oylimpics I think this is actually a pretty major influence on the choice, other than political influence I'd guess a big reason why Germany got a second WC before us was that only West Germany hosted in 74.

No it was because just before the decision had been made, Englishman had disgraced our name by going on drunken rampages in the very Flemish Towns that their great-grandfathers had died to protect the safety of.

If I'd been a FIFA Delegate I'd have voted for Germany.

i am very surprised how the poll is going, Spain is inline with Portugal and Greece? well i thought it would come second but well ahead of the other two.

Ummm...sounds more like politics to me than anything else. I would not react either way. Bladder likes to read himself quoted in the newspapers often.

Brasil for 2014 is still the plan.

I do think Ricardo Teixeira (CBF president), who is FRIEND of Blatter (CBF and FIFA are very close... Ricardo Teixeira is married with the daughter of João Havelange, which was president of FIFA for 20 years and is still honorary president), TOLD BLATTER to make the public criticism of Brazilian stadiums. Teixeira agreed so completely with Blatter criticism... I think Teixeira wanted Blatter to scare the brazilian public and politicians, so real and solid measures to ALREADY start planning new stadiums to be rushed.

People... we are now in 2006... the World Cup is in 2014!!!!! Brazil can build stadiums in 8 years. We hosted a World Cup in 1950 and built the largest stadium in the world for that World Cup. We can do it again.

Hosting a World Cup is much easier than hosting the Olympics. We only have to build or reform 12 stadiums which will be used for the most popular sport in the country. 12 stadiums spread around the country. In the Olympics, you have to build a lot of different style stadiums and arenas and also the olympic Village... all in ONE city... and many of those stadiums will never be used again, since many sports are not really popular outside olympics.

For the record 80% of Argentina's population does not live in one city. Whoever said this absurd figure doesn't know what solar system they inhabit~!



actually, it was a brazilian who said that. Obviously, very exagerated. But trully, Buenos Aires is home to 12 million Argentines... out of a country population of what? 35-40 million?

Buenos Aires alone has 16 professional football clubs!!!!
:eek2: :eek2: :eek2:

Brazil's stadiums are like 50 years old

yes, and hosting a WC is the perfect excuse to build new ones.

The only modern stadium in Brazil right now is Arena da Baixada, in Curitiba.

I think Brazil has enough time to build & remodel stadiums and its infrastructure and to me it seems fair that Brazil hosts the World Cup in 2014.
But if such thing happens of Brazil not hosting, as a Mexican I think the world cup should be awarded to Australia as a front-runner. However the thing is that FIFA wants to keep the 2014 WC in the American continent.

In case of Brazil not hosting, here are my top hosts....

1)Australia
2)Mexico
3)USA

^^ capacity isn't everything. particularly looking at those stadia, this is definately the case!

most of them were built 50 years ago, and they were pretty good for the time. its obvious that new stadiums will have to be built for the WC. CBF WANTS new stadiums, and thats exactly why Blatter is already criticizing Brazil a long time before any official proposal is made, so CBF get support from the media and governent to build new stadiums!

^^^^^^^^^^^^

Oh, okay a Brazilian politician says that everything is working perfectly.

Personally I would not even believe an Australian, American or a British politician and they are borderline honest some of the time.


Ricardo Teixeira is not a POLITICIAN. He is the president of the CBF, Brazil´s Football Confederation (Confederação Brasileira de Futebol).

Brazil has 27 state football federations, and the national confederation. (that happens because Brazil has over 500 PROFESSIONAL football clubs)

have you been to a game in south america recently?

there are no NATION TEAM hooligans in South America. Only club hooligans.

And in Brazil the mothers of famous players are regularly kidnapped. :|


1- they are not REGULARLY kidnapped. There were like 3 cases.
2- they are not kidnapped by hooligans from another clubs. They are kidnapped by normal criminals who wanted the players MONEY...

yes, and hosting a WC is the perfect excuse to build new ones.

The only modern stadium in Brazil right now is Arena da Baixada, in Curitiba.

Very True

Interesting points made.

Assuming that they have a ground-building programme in the works, it would be interesting what the capacities would be. I would think that in the largest cities they can still have a capacity well above 85,000 people, even when considering the insane ticketing policies FIFA likes to institute. This is just a guess but I think we'd see something along the line of...

(Capacity after allocated tickets to the FIFA family and safety in parentheses)
SP - 90,000 (80,000)
Rio - 90,000 (80,000)
Belo - 70,000+ (60,000)
Manaus - 40,000 (32,000)
Curitiba - 40-50,000 (35,000)
Salvador - 40,000 (32,000)
Fortaleza - 50,000 (40,000)
Brasilia - 60,000 (49,000)
PoA - 70,000+ (61,000)

Many of these are going to be smaller to reflect the economic reality of the game.

I think Kazakstan should host it. Borrat & the boys should do a great job!

Many of these are going to be smaller to reflect the economic reality of the game.

I'd guess thats going to be the problem if there is one, unlike Germany Brazilian clubs are not rich enough to build the stadia themselves and unlike Japan the goverment might not be rich enough to either.

Originally posted by Lostboy
Englishman had disgraced our name by going on drunken rampages in the very Flemish Towns that their great-grandfathers had died to protect the safety of.

Couldn't have put it better mate. I don't know why these fucking dickheads exist cos if it wern't for these losers, the English would have such a better reputation abroad. I've had people from Turkey to Thailand quiz me about English football hooliganism whenever they see me in a football strip. Why do these cunts spoil the game for everyone else anyway, can't they just kill each other in one big blood bowl. They are a fuckin disgrace to our nation, and to the beautiful game.

Couldn't have put it better mate. I don't know why these fucking dickheads exist cos if it wern't for these losers, the English would have such a better reputation abroad. I've had people from Turkey to Thailand quiz me about English football hooliganism whenever they see me in a football strip. Why do these cunts spoil the game for everyone else anyway, can't they just kill each other in one big blood bowl. They are a fuckin disgrace to our nation, and to the beautiful game.
Totally agree. It's a small minority that give the large majority a bad name! Thankfully though, football hooliganism has died down in recent years in England, but we'll have to wait for the world cup to see what the situation is really like. At least we don't have the racist cretins that make up a part of the Spanish crowd, or the fashist idiots from Italy!

No it was because just before the decision had been made, Englishman had disgraced our name by going on drunken rampages in the very Flemish Towns that their great-grandfathers had died to protect the safety of.

If I'd been a FIFA Delegate I'd have voted for Germany.

That made sure we had no chance but everything I'v heard since seems to point to the German already having much more support even before that. The fact the final is in Berlin and a couple of stadiums in the east(one of which isnt that good and the other a possible white elephant) certainly point to a united Germany hosting being a selling point.

2014 - South America (Brazil)
2018 - Europe (England)
2022 - Europe (Spain or Netherlands)

The Dutch and Belgian FA's are currently investigating the possibility to launch a joint bid for 2018. I don't give them a chance in hell right now but we'll see how it developes.

2014 - South America (Brazil)
2018 - Europe (England)
2022 - Europe (Spain or Netherlands)

Impossible. Even before the recent concept of "rotation", there was already a rule that the same confederation could not host the World Cup twice in a row...

If we get 2018 I'd guess 2022 would be most likely to go to either China, Australia or the US again.

^^ NO not the USA!!!! AGAIN!!!

^^ do u want to clarify?
Yes, of course. You always talk as if you were the best country in the world, wich has all the best things, skyscrapers, sports venues, stadiums...and slate everything is outside of England or the UK. You boast about your wonderful stadiums and talk about the "Best Stadium in the World" as you call Wembley, a U/C ground that will be a Non-used Wonder, I mean only few games of the national team and few concerts, what's that, a waste of money for instance? Also you say in Italy are fascists and in Spain racists, but first you have to look to your Great Country and prevent the fucking hooligan jam. That's because I quoted, 'cause your patriotism hurts me.

@Its AlL gUUd: The reason because the other two are so near to Spain is 'cause Spain's a very very underrated country, but they don't know we are beginning to build our new era of stadia, around six between 40,000 and 75,000 spectators ;)

I'd say the country that will host 2018 WC is England because it hosted WC a long time ago, England deserves it...

'Its AlL gUUd' is the KING of England/London fanboys, you just have to accept it!! He doesn't realise there is a big world outside of England (he was off school the day they taught Geography as he had a bad cold), so it is not really his fault! I have been trying to educate him, but it is proving difficult!

If Wembley consisted of Godzilla doing a big steaming turd, and the insides being scooped out to form a giant jobby stadium, then 'Its AlL gUUd' would still claim it was the 'best stadium in the world'!!! He would also claim Godzilla is in fact English and England is the home of mythical giant lizards!!

Good to have you back, Bübömb.

Spain is deffinitely not foremost capable of hosting an event of this calibre! England, despite it's very unpredictable climate and weather conditions, is far more suited to holding sporting events then Spain, for lots of deifferent reasons, such as bigger budgets, better organisation, more support, higher number of higher quality stadiums, and a severe lack of racist football supporters when compared to Spain. I don't have anything against Spain here btw, I'm just stating the facts of the matter.

:cheers:
Hahahaha. You need to lift your ass from that chair and travel around, chicken little.